daniel rufer

ARGH!

 

Did this post while setting up my PC again and it wouldn't fill in the form again when I went back from confirmation (could this be the SP2 for XP? :)<br>

so there is an error: 1394b FW goes up to 1200Mb/s = 150!MB/s<p>

and here are the links as hyperlinks:<br>

<a href="http://www.1394ta.org/Technology/About/TechTalk.htm" >Firewire-specs</a><br>

<a href="http://www.usb.org/info/usb_nomenclature" >USB-specs</a><br>

<a href="http://www.sandisk.com/retail/ultra2-cf.asp" >Sandisk ULTRA-II</a><br>

Well, according to this http://www.sandisk.com/retail/ultra2-cf.asp the speed of the ULTRA-II CF's is 10MB/s sustained read speed, my guess is that the non-ULTRA-II isn't faster.<br>

So we deal with a card speed of 10MB/s.<p>

The USB specs are: (http://www.usb.org/info/usb_nomenclature)<br>

- USB 1.0: 1.5Mbit/s = ca. 0.2MB/s<br>

- USB 1.1: 12Mbit/s = ca. 1.5MB/s<br>

- USB 2.0: 480Mbit/s = ca. 60MB/s<p>

So, the USB2.0 would be worth it, unless the non-ULTRA-II card is over 6 times slower than the ULTRA-II (and you will most likely have a ULTRA-II card sooner or later anyway)<p>

As for Firewire: the 1394b standard goes up to 1200Mb/s = ca. 15MB/s, so it is defintely overkill just for a CF-reader. And I guess there are not that many CF-readers with FW around, however there might be some digital videocameras that only have a FW-port.<br>

As for me, I would get a USB 2.0.<p>

Hope that helped a little.<p>

Daniel

Ah yes, I forgot: as Joseph mentioned, get a good focusing rail, I have one from manfrotto, where you turn a geared axis at the front back of the rail (so the knob you turn is perpendicular to what you are used from a bellow for instance). I find this design hard to use and consider buying one that operates similar as a bellows. Novoflex, Bogen and Kaiser (a german brand) make excellent rails.<br>

I also find a L-plate essential, unless you have a tripod collar on every lens you use for macro, otherwise going from horizontal to vertical and back is very frustrating at best.

Hello Shakil<p>

I own a Gitzo Explorer and find it extremely versatile for macro-photography. There is virtually no position you cannot get your camera to be, no matter how difficult it is to put your tripod down (things like flowerbeds at a botanical garden and a suspicious warden make it difficult to get a top-down closeup of a tiny moss as you cannot put one tripod leg into the flowerbed because of the warden... no problem with the cantilever of the explorer, or getting the cammera into a cranny in a rock wall etc).<br>

As to weight: the Explorer is also my main tripod and for hiking, trekking or climbing it is a bit heavy sometimes, but when I saw that the carbon version saves me only very little in weight but cost much more I went for the aluminium version.<br>

As long as I have the Explorer, I have always been fully satisfied with it. It's a great tripod, especially for macro-work!<p>

Hope this helps. Whatever tripod you end up with: have fun!<p>

Daniel

I didn't know that. Well, the first time I showed up at the security check with my hammers and ice-pick was due to simply not thinking that these might not be allowed (was in a hurry, had too much weight and had to repack some at checkin).<br>

Glad that none of these flight was to or from the US. I will think about it when the situation arises. Thanks!

Hehe.. thats a good way to get more stuff on your cary-on baggage, even though you already have your allowed share of carry-on.<p>

While travelling on field trips (I am a geology student), I usually have troubles with the combined weight of my geological/alpine equipment and all the rest of the stuff (as fieldtrips that need a flight usually spell "prolonged stay for vacation afterward :)<br>

I found out, that if I put my heavy hammers, ice-pick etc in carry-on, I end up within the weight limits for the check-in baggage while of course clearly exceeding those for the carry-on. However, that is of no concern, as the hammers etc are singled out on the screening and put into check-in, without being counted towards my already checked in weight! =)<br>

This frees up some weight and space for photography equipment, hehe...

I always thought the rotation for this must be at the rear nodal point? Is this different because it's a fisheye?<p>

Daniel

Hehe, so it was something a little similar to my problem nonetheless. And I thought such things happen only to me... =)<br>

Glad you solved it!<p>

Happy shooting with the "fixed" camera!

Hello Gary<p>

Exactly the same thing happend to me with my FM2.. and the solution was very simple, though it took me over an hour to find out.<p>

Most likely this is not the same problem as yours, but anyway, here is what happened: I had the neckstrap slung tightly around my right wrist (so that I had some sort of a hand-strap, handholding all the time). Because of this, the end of the strap that is connected to the left side of the camera, was close to the aperture ring.<br>

Now: when I changed to vertical, this end of the strap got a bit tightened and rubbed against the aperture coupling ring of the FM2, creating friction and therefore sometimes preventing the FM2 from registering my turning of the aperture ring.<br>

As this also happend in vertical only, I was completely at loss what the reason might be, until I found out that when I hold the camera the other way while shooting vertical (right hand above the camera instead of below) the problem didnt occur... the following "dawning of enlightment" on my face caused quite some laughter from my friends...<p>

They really should write such things into the manual! :)<p>

Hello Stan<p>

Using the self-timer does NOT flip the mirror up in advance, so you have no "pseudo-MLU" as with the FM2 for instance. You can test this for yourself very easy: set the self-timer and look through the viewfinder, it won't get dark (meaning the mirror stays in place) until the picture is actually taken.<br>

But reportedly the mirror-shake of the F100 is very well dampened and is thus not a problem. Owning a F100 myself, I can not detect any sign of mirror-slap induced shake when doing macro-work, so I can second this.<br>

When you are interested in getting a F100, go ahead and get one, It's a superb camera!<p>

Happy shooting<p>

Daniel

I saw in your previous post that you want this setup for wildlife.. well, I guess this means that at one time or another you will have to carry it, or bring it along on an airplane etc. While it may not be too heavy, I guess it will be extremely ackward to transport due to it's size (especially length, it is about 6 times as long as the 500mm f/8 Nikkor). <br>

I think this might be an important point to consider. Also: how is the performance if not focussed to infinity? What is the close focus distance? And how does it perform under these circumstances? I would check these aspects as well...<p>

Just some thoughts, if you decide to try it (or rent one to try it), let us know!

Hmm... that 1sec delayed sound is definitely something I don't observe and I have no clue what it might be. Your assumption might be right and shooting some tests is probably a good idea. <p>I hope the pics turn yout well and you can use the camera.<p> Good luck and have fun!

Well, I just tested this on my Nikkormat ELW (the second EL, the one that was modified for the winder, before the EL2 came out) and here is what I hear when I use the film winding lever:<br>

- from "off" (all the way closed) to "standby" (so that you could snap a pic): no sound<br>

- when winding: the usual sound that indicates the winding (sort of a rrrrrr-sound) with 1 faint click coming from near the lever after ca 3/4 of the lever motion, and another almost at the end (these are due to the start and end of the frame counter advance movement)<br>

- during the release (slowly) of the lever back to the "standby" position I hear a faint sound (need to press my ear against it) like a spring unwinding (most likely the spring that pushes the lever back on its own) and almost back at the "standby" position I hear in short succession 2 clicks, one seeming to originate near the bottom of the camera on the righthand side (where the lever is) and the second possibly on the top left side (near the film rewind crank and the ASA wheel). I think this might be the sound you are referring to (though I do not quite understand what you mean by "about one second each time after I actuate the film winding lever", do you mean there is a sound with a duration of one sec or ot after advancing the film you wait for a sec and hear the sound? In both cases I would not observe that.)<p>

Compared to my FM2 I hear about the same (the frame counter clicks are much fainter and the 2 clicks in the end are more like 3 clicks, with the first being louder and again at the lower right and the other 2 being fainter and towards top left. So, if that is what you hear, I think everything is fine.

I hope this helps, but as Dave said: if it works take the camera out and enjoy it, if the sound indeed does lead to trouble and the camera breaks down (which I somehow doubt), you still have it for a show piece..<p>

Have fun!

I am not sure about the 8xND and polarizer combo, I have the feeling that it might not be sufficient but I am not sure by far.<p>

However 2 points that you have to watch out for:<br>

- Never use drop in filters (at the rear end of the lens) as the focused sunlight will fry it in a very short time.<br>

- If you " hold a piece of welding glass in front of the lens" make ABSOLUTELY SURE that it cannot slide off!! If it does while you are looking through the 300mm lens you risk very serious eye damage. Do not "hold" it, attach it very securely! Besides, I remember I read somewhere that there are several types of welding glasses, some of which are not well suited for solar viewing.<br>

My personal opinion is that you would fare best with a solar filter.

<p>

Take care and I hope you get clear skies that day!<p>

Daniel

Well, you would not have any concern about a heavy camera like the F5 supporting a regular mid-range zoom like the 35-70 f/2.8 would you? <br>

The point is: that would be a lens of about 600g on a body that is more than twice that heavy and the leverage is small. What you have here is about the same: a large, heavy block of about 3kg (the lens) and a small leverage, lightweight block (the D70). You can hold only the lens and be fine, (it's like having a huge 3kg camera with a small 600g lens) and I bet you would have serious trouble holding only the body anyway.<p>

I second the opinion that AF might help, as you will be plenty busy simply holding the lens (I use to shoot handheld with a 80-200 f/2.8 and and this works out weigh-wise for a busy day shooting, but imagining myself to hold about 4kg in front of my nose all the time seems pretty tiring to me).<br>

And - as has been said before - use a fast shutter speed and hope for enough light (or use a mighty big flash with a mighty big flash-extender.. :)<p>

Daniel

If you are talking about the very popular 80-200/2.8 AF-D ED's (the ones with the "distance-chip"), there are basically 3 versions:<br>

- early AF-D version: 1-ring push/pull zomm without tripod collar<br>

- newer AF-D version: 2 ring zoom with collar<br>

- newest AF-S version: 2 ring zoom with collar and silentwave motor<p>

There are also several earlier non-D models, some that were not even IF, check <a href="http://www.photo.net/ezshop/product?product_id=42" >here</a> for additinal info on these versions.<p>

As for quality: I own the 1-ring AF-D version (as I like the handling with the 1 ring zoom, but I have a specially made tripod collar for it as well), and I thoroughly tested the 2 ring AF-D version (my father's) as well as the AF-S (borrowed it from a friend for several days now) and I think the optical quality is more or less identical or only indescernably different. <br>

Which one to buy? Well I would forget about the one without a tripod collar unless you only want to shoot handheld (can be done pretty sucessfully but it will grow heavy after a couple hours :) Can be had very cheap though for a lens of this quality. The AF-S version is pretty expensive, but it is just a terribly wonderful thing to use! But nevertheless, unless you shoot a lot of fast action handheld where focusing-speed is important, or have a body with a week AF-motor (D100, F80 etc) that might focus somewhat slowly for your porpose (I have a F100 and it's usually fast enough for general sports with the non AF-S version), you might save the bucks for the AF-S and get the tripod collar version of the AF-D. This is in my opinion the best value for the money.<p>

All in all, these lenses are among the very best tele-zooms Nikon has to offer, you will enjoy it!<p>

Hope this helps<p>

Daniel

I don't remember the actual numbers, but I once went rather far to find out wether an Ultra-II is worth it, and I found out that on all Nikon DSLR (except D2H, was not out then) and on every digicam I checked, the max write speed (data transfer rate) the cameras can deliver is noticeably to significantly lower than what the Ultra-II cards can write, so no advantage there.<br>

Readout-speed in a good external flashcard-reader can be faster indeed with the Ultra-II cards, but the gain is very small.<p>

HOWEVER: I heard (and my brother had the experience) of problems with Ultra-II cards from digicams: it was always the 512MB ones (but I cannot say that it has to be restricted to them), they stored the pics nicely and in-camera review was working, as did transfer from camera to computer via USB/firewire, BUT a readout with external flashcard-readers produced CRC errors. My brother had this with 2 cards, tested on a Nikon Coolpix 4500 and a Canon G3 (I think), with 2 different card readers (a PCMCIA one under WinXP Pro and an external one under Win2000Pro). He was able to return his card and get a regular (non-Ultra-II) one, which works fine on everything. So, if you buy an ULTRA-II, ask if you could return it in case or test it in the store.<p>

Hope this helps<p>

Daniel

uuups, sorry. Of course Mike is correct, I messed up: the honeycomb shutter is the old one :)<p>

As to what Frank said: he is right when saying that the weatherproofness (does this word exist in english?) of the lenses is a major point to consider (and I would venture so far as to say that several lenses will probably give up before a well sealed camera does). Of course is a F5 a superbly sealed camera and my F100 has also seen rain up close and personal before, but Panos stated that he needs/wants something that works without batteries, and I have to admit that I worry more when my F100 gets well wet with all the elctronics inside (if a circuit board sees too much humidity or even water it most likely fries), than my FM2.<br>

Of course you can run 50 films on one set of batteries in your F100, but when you try to do longtime exposures (several hours) at very low temperatures (e.g. startrails in winter, as the sky is usually clearer and you have nice snow-covered trees), your batteries on a F100 might not last long enough (of course this might not be a thing to worry for many, as will the point that you have to bring tons of spare batteries for that camel-treck all the way across the sahara... but you never know where a Nikon might end up :)<br>

And last but not least: a F5 makes one hell of a large and heavy back-up body :) (though I would very much like to be in a position to have an F5 as a backup :)<p>

Greets<p>

Daniel

Hello Panos<p>

I own a FM2, and I can tell you that they laugh in the face of bad weather! :) <br>

Seriously, as I am a geology student, I often end up on field trips and doing fieldwork at least somewhat "off the beaten track", and that's usually where I take my FM2 instead of my F100. And mine has survived glaciers, torrential downpours, 2 weeks in the Oman desert and much more. The camera got very wet on a number of occasions, once shooting long startrails, I woke to find that it started to rain and my camera was shooting raindrops for quite some time.<br>

A colleague of mine once accidentally dunked a FM2n in a mountain lake for several minutes and though everything got completely wet, he got everything back to working order by thoroughly drying it (hands of the shutter!) and letting it sit open in the sun for the rest of the day (he was able to continue shooting for the rest of the week). He had it checked at a local shop when he came back and they cleaned some little things and it cost him little (about 50 US$ if I remember correctly), though the lens was another issue...<p>

As for which camera: you don't need an FM3A, as the main improvement over an FM2/FM2n is the TTL-flash capability (and you said that is of no concern to you).<br>

Both, the FM2 as well as the FM2N have a shutter speed of up to 1/4000 and as far as I know ISO up to 6400 (never used that, so I have to check). The difference is in the flash sync speed (the FM2 has 1/200 and the FM2n have 1/250). There are more than one version of FM2"n" (some of them are even only labeled as FM2, thus the "n") and the newer ones (I think post 1989) have the new honeycomb shutter. For a detailed way to tell them apart and other info go to

<a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonfmseries/fm2/" >http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonfmseries/fm2/</a>. Weight difference between FM2 and FM2n is nill or negligible as far as I know (handled several FM2n in comparison to my FM2). If you wanted a lighter one, you could go to the veeery expensive FM2/T (titan) :)<br>

Some advice on working in the rain: I would say that an FM2(n) survives probably more than some lenses (I am recollecting troubles with push/pull zooms in very dusty (desert) and wery wet (shooting in the rain) environments, as they neatly "suck up" dust or water when zooming. If you intend to shoot a lot in extreme conditions, consider a Nikonos, but I can assure you that I am always amazed anew at how much my FM2 is capable of surviving. <p>

Have fun with your new camera (whatever you end up with)!<p>

Daniel

Hello Bob<p>

Europe is a very special place on earth. Due to very high atmospheric particle discharges in the so-called TECIZ (Trans-European-Cosmic-Inteference-Zone), light behaves very special and the only films that can be used are Fujy Velvia 100F rated at 50 and Kodacoler Gold 100 rated at 3200. =)<p>

No seriously: take what you like back home. Europe is not different, it depends on where you are going in europe (the mountains and grand vistas, the cities with small streets and lots of shade, Paris with it's great and colorful parks, the forests and national preserves, night shots of Big-Ben in london..) you see, plenty of different occasion where you might want to use different film.<p>

Now the practical advice: ;-)<br>

- You can buy film almost everywhere in europe , but it is generally a little bit more expensive than in the US. So do not be afraid to run out.<br>

- I suggest not to take a film that you have never used before (and therefore you do not know what it will look like), if you can, shoot a roll before you leave and have a look at the colors (pig-colored portraits of that street artist in lisbon is velvia-like, but not necessarily what you want...)<br>

- For slide film: I would suggest Velvia 50 for panoramas and nature stuff (NO SKIN COLORS) where you want really saturated colors, Velvia 100 is somewhat more neutral (but for my taste still to saturated for skin tones) and gives you the advantage of 1 stop speed gain.<br>

For cheap, general use I would also suggest provia or sensia (I believe sensia is cheaper, they are close in what they look like). I usually load sensia if I don't know what will come my way. Both can also be had as 400 ISO if you need the speed.<br>

- Print film: I don't have much experience there, but there is one thing to consider: if you shoot (as you said) a lot inside (I guess museums, churches and galleries and such) you will have a lot of tungsten and fluorescent light. So be prepared for that by either taking filters or choose a corresponding film (now: carrying tungten-films too becomes a hassle as you will always have the wrong film in the camera) or you can take one of the 4-layer films by fuji which are said to behave far better in artifical light (though I have no direct experience there). I might suggest Fuji Superia Reala for "everyday" use, it has a rather natural color rendition, is very sharp and not overly expensive.<br>

For shooting churches and such (where flash and tripod might not be allowed) take a fast film! Suggestions might be Fuji NPZ 800 or the fujicolor press 800 or 1600 (which also have the 4 layers and ar designed for allround use).<br>

- And last: for the "snapshots only" day out one might as well "only" take kodacolor gold (100) print films, which are among the cheapest films and can be had literally everywhere as they seem to be THE tourist film in europe :)<p>

Whatever you will take, take along fun and excitement amidst all the film :) And take lots of pictures! Happy shooting!<p>

Daniel

Jim<p>

Even thoug it can be said, that in landscape photography and other tripod-mounted shots you rarely need a fast lens as you probably operate partially stopped down anyway and a wide-angle is usually not used for selective focus :)<br>

However - aside from its usefulness or even necessity for hand-held shots of mostly non-static subjects in dim light (read: group shots indoors or at the BBQ-party in the evening etc) - a fast lens gives you a brighter viefinder image, whic can be essential if you shoot landscapes in very dim light or do night photography, as composing your shot of a moonlit landscape in the viewfinder at an aperture of f/4 or less is most likely an exercise in frustration...<br>

Aside from that, I would consider quality to be the first critera: I could imagine that the fast lens might be better corrected (distortion and chromatic aberrations etc) as the slower lens /the faster lens being of course larger, heavier and much more expensive). But even a fast prime is most likely smaller than your zoom.<p>

Just my 2 cents...

<p>

Daniel

Hello John<p>

As I said in my first post (somewhat as a reply to your statement that it is safe to rely on the latitude): it indeed is still safe, but you are nearer the edge of that safe area.<br>

Perhaps I am wrong, but I see using the 5 stop film latitude like walking a 5 feet wide crest: walking 2 feet to one side is still safe, but in this situation you have only 1/2 a foot of safe ground on one side but 4.5 feet on the other side, beyond that it gets ugly.<br>

The 5 stop latitude is at a fixed position along a line from ultra overexposure to barely no exposure at all, and everything outside that window of tolerance IS turning ugly (meaning: blown out or total dark). The 5 stop latitude stays always in the same place, given by the films ISO (it's need to a certain amount of light) and its tolerance of how much this optimal amount nof light needed may vary (the 5 stops of print film or the approx. 2 stops of slide film). <br>

If he would compensate -3 stops, would you agree that the picture will be underexposed? So: will it turn from a perfectly good exposure at -2 stops correction to an underexposed shot at -3? That would be an exposure latitude of less than 2 stops total (1 on each side).<p>

My point is: something middletoned in his shot will be underexposed by the -2 correction, the lab sees this (as not only the middletone but the whole picture turns out too dark) and corrects to get some sort of good average exposure. BUT the darker parts of the scene that were captured with the -2 correction, were the beyond the "safe zone" of the 5 stop latitude with this short a shutter speed. And thus cannot produce any detail no matter how much the lab corrects, as this correction occurs AT THE PRINTING STAGE, and the detail was recorded too faint to show up ON THE NEGATIVE without the special chemical treatment of the push-processing.

<br>

Please tell me if I'm wrong. I have never used corrections like this without the proper push/pull processing, but as my theoretical side of the brain sees it, I don't think you can fool light that easily. =)<br>

It will produce a - probably acceptable - picture, with a complete range of bright-middletone-dark parts, BUT the range on the lower end of this will be limited (there are much more tonal ranges in the brighter parts as there will be in the darker ones).<br>

Well next time I shoot print film, I will certainly shoot some frames like this to see what happens... I might again learn something new :)<p>

Daniel

Well, print film does indeed have around 5 stops of latitude, meaning that with 2 stops of exposure correction and no explicit push-processing you are still within the range the film can handle....<br>

BUT: the latitude is here to help you get detail in highlights AND shadows (2.5 stops of tolerance to either side). If you "move" your exposure 2 stops towards one end WITHOUT correcting for that with the appropriate processing (push or pull processing) you end up with having around 0.5 stops of exposure latitude on one side and about 4.5 stops on the other.<br>

You cannot cheat light, if you let in 2 stops less than you would need, the brightest parts of your image have 2 stops less light, as do the average and the dark parts, with the result that a 5 stop (+/-2.5) latitude film will end up having the highlights only slightly brighter than average, the average tonalities pretty dark, and the dark ones completey black. To avoid this, you either have to meter for the dark parts,expose longer and thus loose the speed gained by telling the camera that you use a faster film, or process accordingly (ask for a push-processing, in this case of 2 stops) to take that shift into account, which will probably be a bit more expensive.<p>

The amount of exposure of our film is governed by the ISO of the film and the amount of light that reaches it (which is set by shutter speed and aperture), so if you double the sensitivity of the film (1 stop), you can reduce either the shutter speed or the aperture by 1 stop and have the same exposure, so ISO 100 @ f/5.6 and 1/100 is the same as ISO 200 (+1 stop) @ f/8 (-1 stop) and 1/100 or ISO 200 (+1) @f/5.6 and 1/200 (-1) or ISO 50 (-1) @ f/16 (-3) and 1/6 (+4). <br>

But if you only "tell" your camera that you gained 2 stops with the ISO without physically/cemically gaining them by changin film, your film sensitivity is still that of an 100 ISO film and you have to correct this in the processing or you end up 2 stops short.

So my solution would be to use a -2 stop exposure correction but then you HAVE to ask for push processing.

I don't know if this is very clear, sorry...<p>

Daniel

I bought some of these "lens cap holder strings" or whatever they are called. It's a string that has a small button-like thing attached to it, which can be glued onto the lens cap or - in this case - to the plastic cover of the remote connectors, while the string can be knotted to the camera strap holder.<br> The round button is just slightly larger than the 10 pin connnector cover and I find it actually quite a lot easier to unscrew it with this than only the cover itself. I added this to my F100 right after I got it, foreseeing that I will otherwise loose these covers immediately :)<br> Alternative I have seen solutions with the string directly glued onto the plastic cover with superglue, but this does not give you the additional grip as with the button glued to it.<p>

Hope this helps, as keeping to loose these covers seems to be really expensive over time...<p>

Daniel

Hello <p>

I own the 80-200 2.8 AF-D (not the AF-S) and a Kenko Pro 300 (2x) TC as well.<br>

It is correct that you loose 2 stops of light with the 2x TC, so you end up with a 160-400 5.6 lens (or if you use the 1.4x you loose only 1 stop -> 160-400 f/4), but of course it is not advisable to use the <200mm range as you would be bettor off without the TC oobviously. Image quality with this combo is excellent, but I would suggest to stop down 1 or 2 stops to be on the perfectly safe side, though you can take shots at 400mm wide open that are not "soft" or only if seen through a microsccope :)<br>

BUT: you do need to make sure to use the best technique (meaning: sturdy tripod, MLU, cable release etc), forget handholding something like this under most circumstances. <br>

Also: if you use a 2xTC and end up with f/5.6 as minimal aperture, some bodies might have problems with AF as there is not enough light (I tested in complete darkness with the red AF-illuminator grid on a F90X and a F100 and this particular F90X had slight problems of getting AF to work every time, but at ambient light levels both were ok). But I could imagine that with a F80 or D100 or D70 there might be problems, and if your viewfinder is not very bright (D70) you will have a hard time to manually focus this. <br>

The Kenko Pro 300 TC's support full metering and AF (AF-S as well, but make sure to test the one you will buy, as I heard and read of some rare cases where it didn't) AF speed on my non AF-S lens is slighly slower with the TC but still acceptably fast, BUT this is on a F100, on a D100/F80 it was reeeeally slow, as with non AF-S the AF speed is determined mainly by the motor in the body (not sure if it will focus slower with AF-s, you have to test this). <br>

An alternative would be the Nikon TC's (not sure which ones), but they are generally much more expensive and sometimes do not support metering or AF, but let the specialists answer that. The Kenkos are generally very highly regarded and I can say that I am very happy with mine.<p>

Hope this helps a bit..